beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty part shall be reversed.
The punishment of the accused shall be determined by a year of imprisonment.
except that this judgment.
Reasons
1. Of the facts charged in this case, the court below found the defendant guilty as to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes listed in the annexed Table 1, No. 1, No. 3, and No. 21, No. 24, and No. 27 of the annexed Table 1 in the judgment of the court below, among the facts charged in this case, as to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes listed in the annexed Table 2, No. 18, No. 21, No. 24, and No. 27 of the annexed Table 1 in the judgment of the court below, and the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes listed in the annexed Table 1, No. 2, No. 17, No. 22, and No. 23 in the judgment of the court below, and acquitted the defendant as to the violation of the Act on
The judgment below
Of the judgment of the court below, the defendant appealed against the guilty part among the guilty part and the acquittal part of the judgment of the court below, as stated in No. 1 No. 2, No. 3, and No. 6 of the attached Table 2 of the crime list of the court below, the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (including Production, Distribution, etc. of obscenity) and the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Abuse (production, etc. of obscenity). However, the prosecutor did not appeal against the defendant as to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes as stated in the attached Table 2 of the crime List of the judgment of the court below, since the acquittal part of the judgment of the court below is already separately finalized and excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (in the original judgment, the Defendant entered the building No. 3 and No. 5 in the attached Table 1 of the Crime List in the original judgment). The Defendant entered the commercial building to carry out an election campaign at the Fluice Center, which was ordinarily used, and was unable to carry out an election campaign with the leave of absence of the Fluice Center.